2015
DOI: 10.1016/j.matdes.2015.07.059
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Numerical investigation of the effect of interfacial thermal resistance upon the thermal conductivity of copper/diamond composites

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
4
1

Citation Types

0
11
0

Year Published

2016
2016
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
5
1

Relationship

1
5

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 49 publications
(11 citation statements)
references
References 45 publications
0
11
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Compared to case 1 ( Figure 5 a), cases 2 and 3 demonstrate relatively more irregular temperature profiles for two additional interface related reasons: the thermal resistance and the debonding. Note that a finite value of thermal conductance, 14 kW·m −2 ·K −1 [ 18 ], was used throughout, which resulted in a difference in temperatures across the Cu/diamond interface. Coupled with the difference in CTEs, an uneven expansion of the matrix and the reinforcement led to the interfacial debonding in the absence of ‘cohesion’ between the surfaces.…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…Compared to case 1 ( Figure 5 a), cases 2 and 3 demonstrate relatively more irregular temperature profiles for two additional interface related reasons: the thermal resistance and the debonding. Note that a finite value of thermal conductance, 14 kW·m −2 ·K −1 [ 18 ], was used throughout, which resulted in a difference in temperatures across the Cu/diamond interface. Coupled with the difference in CTEs, an uneven expansion of the matrix and the reinforcement led to the interfacial debonding in the absence of ‘cohesion’ between the surfaces.…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Since the interfacial debonding can lead to the degradation of material properties, the present work primarily deals with the FE analysis of a Cu/D composite subjected to thermal loading. The initial phases of this work were dedicated to, (i) the fabrication of Cu/D composites using uncoated, Cu-coated (CuD), and Cr-coated diamonds (CrD); (ii) the experimental identification of effective TC and optimization of sintering parameters [ 7 ]; and (iii) the numerical investigation of the effect of the interfacial boundary resistance upon the effective TC [ 18 ].…”
Section: Scope and Methodologymentioning
confidence: 99%
“…[16,17] Thev alue of the interfacial thermal resistance in composites is typically in the range of 10 À9 to 10 À4 Km 2 W À1 . [12,14,17] Thev alue of R i = 0.010 AE 0.005 Km 2 W À1 reported here is much higher than these typicalv alues,w hich may indicate low adhesion of the polymerm atrixt ot he surface.A nother factor contributing towards the increased interfacial thermal resistance that we observe could be the pores that are present in the polymer but that are not included in the simulation because they cannot be sufficiently distinguished from the matrix.H owever, more detailed measurements and simulations are needed to examine the true origin of this large interfacial resistance. In general, the results show that matrixm aterials for magnetocaloric composites should not only be compared regarding their thermal conductivitya nd mechanical stability,b ut also regarding their interfacial resistance for heat transport to the magnetocaloric material.…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 50%
“…Nevertheless, the value of interfacial thermal resistance might depend on the material combination as well as the size and shape of the particles . The value of the interfacial thermal resistance in composites is typically in the range of 10 −9 to 10 −4 K m 2 W −1 . The value of R i =0.010±0.005 K m 2 W −1 reported here is much higher than these typical values, which may indicate low adhesion of the polymer matrix to the surface.…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation